once i open up nero vison 4, and export a video file using the DVD template, once its exported using AC3 2.0 audio or stereo or AC3 5.1, the end product comes up as mono, does anyone have the same prob or is there anyone who can help me?

well, basically, i just ripped my michael jackson dangerous short films dvd using dvd decrypter, i ripped it by cell ID so i can get the music videos individually, so they are vob files, i then tried to export them using nero 7 ultra, and that problem arrived.

Errrrrrrrr,Hmmm.....where are you seeing mono may i ask?
Nothing there that says either.LPCM..is your audio & that means uncompressed,whatever it was.
2 channels.....ok thats your left & right.I don't see mono...but i dont see stereo.

Errrrrrrrr,Hmmm.....where are you seeing mono may i ask?
Nothing there that says either.LPCM..is your audio & that means uncompressed,whatever it was.
2 channels.....ok thats your left & right.I don't see mono...but i dont see stereo.

Most artists have made little effort to pursue legal action about bootleg recordings, viewing such "rarities trading" as harmless provided that it is not being done for profit. The benefits of interfering with such trading are fairly minimal compared to the potential ill-will generated against the artist, as the illicit works are generally circulated among the artist's most loyal fans, which have the most interest. Most record companies also have not shown an interest in pursuing or prosecuting small-scale bootleggers, but this could change at any time.

First-sale doctrine
The first-sale doctrine is a limitation upon copyright that was recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1908 and subsequently codified in the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 109. The doctrine of first sale allows the purchaser to transfer (i.e. sell or give away) a particular, lawfully made copy of the copyrighted work without permission once it has been obtained. That means that a copyright holder's rights to control the distribution of a particular copy end once that copy is sold.
Originally, in 1909, the codification applied to copies that had been sold (hence the "first sale doctrine"), but in the 1976 Act it was made to apply to any "owner" of a lawfully made copy or phonorecord regardless whether it was first sold. So, for example, if the copyright owner licenses someone to make a copy (such as by downloading), then that copy (meaning the tangible medium of expression onto which it was copied under license, be it a hard drive or removable storage medium) may lawfully be sold, lent, traded or given away.

The doctrine of first sale does not include renting and leasing phonorecords (recorded music) and certain types of computer software, although private non-profit archives and libraries are allowed to lend these items provided they include a notice that the work may be copyrighted on the copy.

The United States No Electronic Theft Act (NET Act), a federal law passed in 1997, provides for criminal prosecution of individuals who engage in copyright infringement, even when there is no monetary profit or commercial benefit from the infringement. Maximum penalties can be five years in prison and up to $250,000 in fines. The NET Act also raised statutory damages by 50%.

Prior to the enactment of the NET Act in 1997, copyright infringement for a noncommercial purpose was apparently not punishable by criminal prosecution, although noncommercial infringers could be sued in a civil action by the copyright holder to recover damages. At that time, criminal prosecutions under the copyright act were possible only when the infringer derived a commercial benefit from his or her actions. This state of affairs was underscored by the unsuccessful 1994 prosecution of David LaMacchia, then a student at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, for allegedly facilitating massive copyright infringement as a hobby, without any commercial motive. The court's decision in United States v. LaMacchia suggested that then-existing criminal law simply did not apply to noncommercial infringements (a state of affairs which became known as the "LaMacchia Loophole"). The court suggested that Congress could act to make some noncommercial infringements a crime, and Congress acted on that suggestion in the NET Act.

The NET Act amends the definition of "commercial advantage or private financial gain" to include the exchange of copies of copyrighted works even if no money changes hands and specifies penalties of up to five years in prison and up to $250,000 in fines. It also creates a threshold for criminal liability even where the infringer neither obtained nor expected to obtain anything of value for the infringement.

The NET Act raised the levels of statutory damages to $750 -- $30,000 per work (or actual damages or infringer's profits, whichever is greater). In cases of willful infringement, the act allows individuals to be held civilly liable for statutory damages of up to $150,000 per work infringed).

The NET Act could be applied to the unauthorized trading of infringing MP3 files, although music file-sharing was not yet widely practiced by 1997. The infringements of greatest interest to industry at that time were primarily infringing copies of software.

Errrrrrrrr,Hmmm.....where are you seeing mono may i ask?
Nothing there that says either.LPCM..is your audio & that means uncompressed,whatever it was.
2 channels.....ok thats your left & right.I don't see mono...but i dont see stereo.

[edit] Criminal offences
For the most part, the criminal law is only used for commercial copyright infringement with one exception, and an offence is committed when, knowing or reasonably suspecting that the files are illegal copies, and without the permission of the copyright owner, a person:

makes unauthorised copies e.g. burning music files or films on to CD-Rs or DVD-Rs;
distributes, sells or hires out unauthorised copies of CDs, VCDs and DVDs;
on a larger scale, distributes unauthorised copies as a commercial enterprise on the internet;
possesses unauthorised copies with a view to distributing, selling or hiring these to other people;
while not dealing commercially, distributes unauthorised copies of software packages, books, music, games, and films on such a scale as to have a measurable impact on the copyright owner's business.
publishing someone else's original copy work and claiming you have made it. (This is known as plagiarism and is completely different to copyright infringement, but laws concerning it come under the section of copyright law in some countries)
The penalties for these "copyright infringement" offences depend on the seriousness of the offences:

before a magistrates' Court, the penalties for distributing unauthorised files are a maximum fine of £5,000 ($9,202) and/or six months imprisonment;
in the Crown Court, the penalties for distributing unauthorised files are an unlimited fine and/or up to 10 years imprisonment

Most artists have made little effort to pursue legal action about bootleg recordings, viewing such "rarities trading" as harmless provided that it is not being done for profit. The benefits of interfering with such trading are fairly minimal compared to the potential ill-will generated against the artist, as the illicit works are generally circulated among the artist's most loyal fans, which have the most interest. Most record companies also have not shown an interest in pursuing or prosecuting small-scale bootleggers, but this could change at any time.